A Ten Year Economic Look at Wisconsin Dairy Systems Tom Kriegl and Gary Frank 1 November 28, Introduction
|
|
- Patrick Rich
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 A Ten Year Economic Look at Wisconsin Dairy Systems Tom Kriegl and Gary Frank 1 November 28, 2005 Introduction For more than a decade, concern has been expressed about the shrinking of the Wisconsin milk production capacity on three fronts: cow numbers, farm numbers and total milk production. This trend is especially troubling because the U.S. demand for milk and milk products has been increasing. Therefore Wisconsin is supplying a decreasing share of a growing market. The exact cause of this decrease is unknown but it may be related to our relatively old facilities and high cost of production (low net income). In addition, the attitudes and wants of some farm managers and their families have changed. Today they want a family income closer to those of their urban cousins and they want time away from the farm to spend with their families. To achieve this, some farm managers have greatly expanded their herds and completely changed the way their cows are milked and cared for while others have started grazing their herds. Will these new systems reduce the cost of production and/or help farm managers meet some of their other goals compared to our traditional system? This paper will use ten years of data to look at these questions. Dairy Farm System Definitions The following is a brief description of the three dairy systems studied. 1) Management Intensive Rotational Grazing (MIRG) operations in which an attempt is made to harvest up to half of the herds' forage needs via grazing. 2) The traditional confinement (TC) family sized farm (50 75 cows) with a stanchion barn, stored feed and mainly family labor. 3) The large modern confinement (LMC) dairy farm that uses a parlor for milking and free stalls to house cattle. Most LMC operations have recently expanded to 250 or more cows and rely heavily on hired labor and stored feed. Data Source Lakeshore Farm Management Association, Fox Valley Management Association, Wisconsin Farm and Business Management Association, Wisconsin County Agents, Wisconsin Technical College System Instructors, and Center for Dairy profitability staff originally collected this data. They helped individual farm managers reconcile their financial data. Individual farm managers used a number of different manual and computerized record keeping systems to enter the initial financial records, including the Agricultural Accounting and Information Management System (AAIMS ) The computer program called Agricultural Financial Advisor (AgFA ) was used to analyze the data for this report. Cost Calculation Method Dairy farms have numerous sources of income: milk, cull cows, calves, MILC payment, cooperative dividends, property tax credit on income taxes, crop-related government payments, etc. This large number of income sources makes using an equivalent income unit essential. In addition, on most dairy farms the cost of producing crops sold for cash cannot be separated from the cost of producing crops fed to the dairy herd. The farm's total income (including cash sales of crops and changes in the value of feed and cattle inventories) must be included when calculating equivalent units. For this analysis, the equivalent unit used was Hundredweight of Milk Sales Equivalent (CWT EQ). The formula is: Total Farm Income from all Sources U.S. All Milk Price per Hundredweight (for the year in question) 1 Center for Dairy Profitability, College of Agricultural and Life Sciences and Cooperative Extension, University of Wisconsin Madison. Please see the Center s Website at 1
2 Background A better understanding of the results presented in this paper may require some additional background definitions and information. Tables 1, 2 and 3 and the intervening paragraphs attempt to provide that. Total income includes all sources of income including non-cash. Typical sources of non-cash income are changes in stored raised crops inventory, changes in raised breeding livestock numbers and changes in raised market livestock. These changes can be either positive or negative. Total cost includes all possible costs including the opportunity cost of unpaid labor, management and capital supplied by the owner(s). It is difficult to be fair in estimating opportunity costs when comparing different systems. Therefore total costs won t be shown here. Allocated cost equals total cost minus the opportunity cost of unpaid labor, management and capital supplied by the owner(s). Net Farm Income from Operations (NFIFO) is total income minus allocated costs. NFIFO can be smaller, larger or equal to the combined opportunity cost of unpaid labor, management and capital supplied by the owning family. Since everyone does not consciously calculate opportunity cost, non-economists often use allocated cost as a default proxy for total cost. Basic costs are all the cash and non-cash costs except the opportunity costs, interest, depreciation, paid labor, and paid management. Livestock depreciation is included as a basic cost to reflect the depreciation costs associated with differing cull rates between systems. It is included with basic costs, because like all other basic cost items, it is greatly influenced by daily management decisions. Basic cost is a useful measure for comparing one farm to another that differs by: the amount of paid versus unpaid labor the amount of paid versus unpaid management the amount of debt the investment level the capital consumption claimed (depreciation) Basic cost is very similar to the cost of goods concept that is commonly used by many non-farm businesses. Since basic cost primarily includes variable expenses (those most affected by short run decisions), it comes close to determining the minimum amount of income needed per unit of production to continue producing in the short run. Table 1 shows that in 2004, the MIRG group had a $-1.36 ( ) advantage in basic cost/cwt EQ over the LMC group and a $-0.65 ( ) advantage over the TC group. In 1997, the MIRG group had a $ ( ) advantage in basic cost/cwt EQ over the LMC group and a $-0.54 ( ) advantage over the TC group. The only exception to this pattern occurred in 2003 when the TC group had a lower basic cost per CWT EQ then graziers. Table 1 Dollars of Basic Cost (including Livestock Depreciation)/CWT EQ *** *** *** *** *** Data for confinement farms was not fully sorted into the groups listed above until 1996 and by labor compensation type until The basic cost per CWT EQ for the average Wisconsin confinement farm in 1995 and 1996 was $7.41 and $8.55 respectfully. Non-basic costs are interest, (non-livestock) depreciation, paid labor and paid management. Basic cost plus non-basic costs equal allocated costs. 2
3 Table 2 shows that in 2004, the MIRG group had a $-0.59 ( ) advantage over the LMC group and a $-1.16 ( ) advantage over the TC group. In 1997, the MIRG group had a $-1.70 ( ) advantage over the LMC group and a $-1.09 ( ) advantage over the TC group. The only exception to this pattern occurred in 1999 and 2002 when the LMC group had a slightly lower non-basic cost/cwt EQ than the TC group. Table 2 Non-Basic Cost/CWT EQ (Interest Non-livestock Depreciation, Paid Labor and Management) *** *** *** *** labor compensation type until The non-basic cost/cwt EQ average for Wisconsin confinement farms in 1996 and 1995 was $4.21 and $3.55 respectfully. Table 3 shows the lbs of milk sold per average cow in each system each year. Table 3 shows the following ranking of lbs of milk sold per average cow from highest to lowest; LMC, TC, and MIRG. Production per cow appears to be increasing slightly over time for the groups. Milk sold per cow bounced up and down in a narrow range for the MIRG group. Table 3 Pounds of Milk Sold per Cow per Year ,526 19,962 22, ,726 19,881 23, ,644* 19,490 22, ,644* 19,383 22, ,306 19,773 21, ,481 19,590 21, ,231 19,243 22, ,200 18,549 20, ,769 *** *** ,043 *** *** labor compensation type until The lbs of milk sold per cow for the average Wisconsin confinement farm in 1995 and 1996 were 18,463 and 18,493 respectively. * By coincidence MIRG lbs of milk sold per cow was the same in 2001 and Results The cost per hundredweight of milk equivalent sold (CWT EQ) method was used to compare the economic competitiveness of the three milk production systems. Of course, other measures of economic performance plus non-economic concerns and objectives are valid and useful too. Note: When the Cost of Production (COP) is calculated using the CWT EQ method, the group that has the lowest total allocated COP per CWT EQ also has the highest Net Farm Income from Operations (NFIFO) per CWT EQ. NFIFO, as defined by the Farm Financial Standards Council (FFSC), is the return to the unpaid labor and management plus a return to the owner s equity capital. Total allocated costs include all costs except opportunity costs. Table 4 shows the NFIFO per CWT EQ for the MIRG, TC, and LMC Wisconsin dairy farm systems from 1995 through In 2004, the MIRG group had a $2.05 ( ) NFIFO per CWT EQ advantage 3
4 over the LMC group and a $0.85 ( ) advantage over the TC group. In 1997, the advantage for the MIRG group was $2.60 ( ) over the LMC group and $1.56 ( ) over the TC group. Table 4 also shows the multi-year simple average NFIFO per CWT EQ. Using simple averages during the multiple year comparison periods, the advantage for the MIRG group was $2.31 ( ) over the LMC group and $1.31 ( ) over the TC group. This advantage has to be examined carefully because some costs are excluded using the FFSC method of calculating NFIFO. This method excludes the opportunity cost of owner and family labor and management and includes paid labor and management. Since many LMC operations are farm corporations, they not only hire a majority of their labor but also pay a wage to most of the family members that work in the farm business. Tables 5 and 6 address this issue. In addition, Table 4 shows the range in the number of farms observed in each system and the range in average herd size for each system during the eight-year period. The average herd size in the LMC group ranged from 443 to 519 over the ten-year period. The average herd size in the MIRG group ranged from 50 to 71 over the ten-year period. The number of observations in the MIRG group (19 to 43) is less than the number of observations in the TC group (180 to 216) and the LMC group (34 to 80). However these results are consistent with grazing data from other states in the northeast quarter of the country. 2 Table 4 Net Farm Income from Operations (NFIFO) per Hundredweight Equivalent of Milk Sold (CWT EQ) Under Different Wisconsin Dairy Systems (US Dollars) *** *** Multiple Year Simple Average NFIFO/CWT EQ Range in Numbers of Observations 2 Range in Average # of Cows/Herd/ Year *** Data for confinement farms was not fully sorted into the groups listed above until The NFIFO per CWT EQ for the average Wisconsin confinement farm in 1995 was $1.90. There are three types of labor and management on the farms in this study. They are: unpaid or opportunity cost of labor and management (those costs were excluded when NFIFO was calculated for Table 4), wages for labor and management paid to dependents (these costs as well as the unpaid labor and management costs were excluded when NFIFO was calculated for Table 5) and non-dependent paid labor and management. Table 6 excludes all three types of labor and management. On some smaller TC and MIRG farms none of the labor or management is paid. On some LMC farms all the labor and management is paid. Therefore using the Farm Financial Standards Council method of calculating NFIFO provides an advantage to the smaller TC and MIRG farms in the calculation of NFIFO. One way to reduce that advantage is to calculate a NFIFO plus all paid labor and management value. In other words, 2 Knoblauch, Wayne A., Linda D. Putnam, Jason Karszes Dairy Farm Management: Business Summary, New York State, Cornell University, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. December. 4
5 make a calculation of NFIFO assuming ALL labor and management is unpaid. Table 6 makes such a calculation by excluding all three types of labor and management for costs. Table 5 shows the average NFIFO per CWT EQ for each system for each year if wages and benefits paid to dependents of the owner(s) were not included as a cost. This table was constructed because dependents (spouse and children) are not paid a competitive wage in all farm businesses. Consequently the calculations in Table 4 favor the farm businesses that pay the least competitive wage or no wage at all to dependents. Therefore, not including wages and benefits paid to dependents starts to make the comparison of NFIFO per CWT EQ more impartial. Table 5 shows that in 2004, the MIRG group had a $1.98 ( ) NFIFO per CWT EQ advantage over the LMC group and a $0.10 ( ) advantage over the TC group. In 1997, the advantage for the MIRG group was $2.36 ( ) over the LMC group and $0.84 ( ) over the TC group. This narrows the MIRG group s advantage over the LMC group somewhat (from $2.31 to $1.98 in 2004 and from $2.60 to $2.36 in 1997) but not substantially. It narrowed the MIRG advantage over the TC group from $0.85 to $0.10 in 2004 and from $1.56 to $0.84 in 1997 Table 5 NFIFO per CWT EQ If Dependent Labor Compensation Were Unpaid (Otherwise Same Data as Table 4) *** *** *** *** labor compensation type until Table 6 shows that in 2004, the MIRG group had a $0.40 ( ) NFIFO per CWT EQ advantage over the LMC group and a $0.02 ( ) advantage over the TC group. In 1997, the advantage for the MIRG group was $1.58 ( ) over the LMC group and $1.26 ( ) over the TC group. Moving from table 4 to table 6, the MIRG group s advantage over the LMC group narrowed from $2.31 to $0.40 in 2004 and from $2.60 to $1.58 in The gap between the groups remains, but this comparison shows that the decision on which labor costs to exclude accounts for some of the differences between the groups. Note: We did not try to calculate net income if the unpaid or opportunity cost labor and management were included as a cost because selecting a method for determining the value of unpaid labor and management is controversial. In nine of ten years the MIRG group still had the highest NFIFO/CWT EQ if all labor was unpaid. In 2003, the MIRG and TC groups traded positions. The LMC group remained on the bottom all ten years. Table 6 also shows the MIRG group had a $0.79( ) advantage over the TC group and a $1.12( ) advantage over the LMC group in comparing the multiple year simple average NFIFO/CWT EQ for the dairy systems. 5
6 Table 6 NFIFO per CWT EQ If All Labor Compensation Were Unpaid (Otherwise Same Data as Table 4) *** *** *** *** Multiple Year Simple Average NFIFO/CWT EQ labor compensation type until The NFIFO per CWT EQ for the average Wisconsin confinement farm was $3.34 in 1996 and $2.97 in Based on Tables 4, 5 and 6 it may seem like LMC expansion will not solve any problems facing the Wisconsin industry. While expansion does not appear to solve the cost of production problems facing the Wisconsin dairy industry, it can, however, solve some of the problems facing individual farm managers. Many farm managers say they expand to address the two major problems commonly associated with operating a dairy farm. One of these problems is very little time away from the dairy. The second problem is limited money for family living. In smaller dairies, most of the labor and management is embodied in the operator and the operator s family. Therefore, family vacations are nearly impossible and time to attend the children s school activities are at a premium. Larger farms (like the farms in the LMC group, but regardless of system) have a large pool of labor and management allowing the owner(s) to have time away from the dairy. The second issue, additional money for family living, also appears to be addressed by LMC system. Table 7 shows the average total NFIFO for each system for each year. Table 7 is based on the values from Table 4 and shows that the LMC system provides 2 to 4 times the NFIFO per farm. Readers need to understand that most of the farms in the MIRG and TC groups are owned and operated by one owner/operator family. Many of the LMC farms are owned and operated by more than one owner/operator family. At this point the data doesn t indicate the exact number of owner/operator families per LMC farm. Table 7 also shows that the MIRG farms provide more NFIFO per farm than the TC group of farms. This is somewhat misleading because TC farm managers pay more to their dependents than MIRG farm managers (see the discussion of Table 5 above). When we do not include wage payments to dependents in the NFIFO calculation, it becomes the dollars available to the owner and owner s family for family living or savings. After doing this, the LMC system still has a clear advantage in NFIFO per farm, but the MIRG and TC systems are now nearly equal, with the MIRG having the advantage some years and the TC systems having the advantage in other years. Table 7 Comparing the Net Farm Income from Operations between Different Dairy Systems ,091 56, , ,655 41, , ,928 15,564 59, ,446 36, , ,340 26,320 61, ,110 45, , ,045 49, , ,780 28, , ,786 29, , ,104 *** *** 6
7 labor compensation type until The NFIFO for the average Wisconsin confinement farm in 1995 was $32,496. Conclusions It is not the intent of this paper to anoint one dairy system as the system of the future in the Wisconsin dairy industry. The intent is to highlight some key measures revealed by economic analysis, and to provide better decision-making information to farm families. Tables 4, 5 and 6 show the following ranking of NFIFO per CWT EQ; (from highest to lowest) MIRG, TC, and LMC. In all years shown in the tables, the MIRG group was a lower cost producer than either confinement group. Also, the LMC group always had the lowest NFIFO per CWT EQ and was the high cost producer. Once in ten years (2003), the TC group would have had the highest NFIFO/CWT EQ if all labor were unpaid. Table 7 shows NFIFO per farm in the LMC group is 2 to 5 times the NFIFO per farm in the MIRG and TC groups. However, it is likely that most of the farms in the MIRG and TC groups are owned and operated by one owner/operator family. Whereas, many of the LMC farms are owned and operated by more than one owner/operator family. In the past, we have not collected the number of owner/operator families per farm because of the difficulty of defining an "owner/operator family". We are attempting to agree on a definition and collect that data in the future. References Vanderlin, Jenny, Gary Frank. Milk Production Costs in 2004 on Selected Wisconsin Dairy Farms. University of Wisconsin-Madison, Center for Dairy Profitability, August 2004 and others at cdp.wisc.edu. Knoblauch, Wayne A., Linda D. Putnam, Jason Karszes Dairy Farm Management: Business Summary, New York State, Cornell University, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. October. Kriegl, Tom, Jim Endress, Larry Tranel, Robert Tigner, Ed Heckman, Bill Bivens, Phil Taylor, Chris Wolf Margot Rudstrom, Tony Rickard, Jim Grace, Thomas Noyes, Clif Little, Jack Kyle, John Molenhuis, J. Craig Williams, and Gary Frank Dairy Grazing Farms Financial Summary: Regional/Multi- State Interpretation of Small Farm Data, Fourth Year Report, Great Lakes Grazing Network. April. 7
An Eight Year Economic Look at Wisconsin Dairy Systems Tom Kriegl and Gary Frank 1 June 22, 2004
An Eight Year Economic Look at Wisconsin Dairy Systems Tom Kriegl and Gary Frank 1 June 22, 2004 Introduction For more than a decade, concern has been expressed about the shrinking of the Wisconsin milk
More informationMILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2001 on Selected WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS
MILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2001 on Selected WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS By Gary Frank and Jenny Vanderlin 1 July 22, 2002 Introduction The good news is that higher milk prices in 2001 caused an increased of almost
More informationMajor Cost Items on Wisconsin Organic, Grazing, and Confinement (Average of All Sizes) Dairy Farms
Major Cost Items on Wisconsin Organic, Grazing, and Confinement (Average of All Sizes) Dairy Farms By Tom Kriegl 1 February 19, 2008 Cost management should receive regular attention on any farm. Focusing
More informationMILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2000 on Selected WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS
MILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2000 on Selected WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS By Gary Frank 1 July 27, 2001 Introduction In 2000, the U.S. Average Milk Price ($12.33) was less than the study farms' total economic cost
More informationPastures of plenty. Financial performance of Wisconsin grazing dairy farms. Prepared by Tom Kriegl, UW-Madison Center for Dairy Profitability
Pastures of plenty Financial performance of Wisconsin grazing dairy farms Prepared by Tom Kriegl, UW-Madison Center for Dairy Profitability Edited by Ruth McNair, UW-Madison Center for Integrated Agricultural
More informationMILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2008 On Selected WISONSIN DAIRY FARMS
MILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2008 On Selected WISONSIN DAIRY FARMS By Ken Bolton and Jenny Vanderlin 1 October 2009 Introduction The Basic Cost of Production increased in 2008 by $0.35/cwt equivalent (CWT
More informationMILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2009 on Selected WISONSIN DAIRY FARMS
MILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 2009 on Selected WISONSIN DAIRY FARMS By Ken Bolton and Jenny Vanderlin 1 Introduction January 2011 The good news is that Wisconsin dairy farmers lowered their basic cost of production
More informationMILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 1998 on Selected WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS
MILK PRODUCTION COSTS in 1998 on Selected WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS by Gary Frank and Jenny Vanderlin 1 July 23, 1999 Introduction Total cost of production per hundredweight equivalent of milk ($14.90) was
More informationWISCONSIN AgFA DAIRY FARMS PROFITABILITY REPORT 2009 PRODUCTION YEAR
A Center for Dairy Profitability Report and UW-Extension publication WISCONSIN AgFA DAIRY FARMS PROFITABILITY REPORT 2009 PRODUCTION YEAR by Ryan Sterry and Jenny Vanderlin 1 April 2011 1 Ryan Sterry,
More informationMILK PRODUCTION COSTS and SELECTED FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS FROM 978 WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS
1996 1 MILK PRODUCTION COSTS and SELECTED FINANCIAL BENCHMARKS FROM 978 WISCONSIN DAIRY FARMS by Gary Frank and Jenny Vanderlin 2 August 27, 1997 Introduction In this study of 1996 records, 978 dairy farms
More informationSummary of Economic Studies of Organic Dairy Farming in Wisconsin (Seven Years), New England, and Quebec. By Tom Kriegl 1 June 28, 2007
Summary of Economic Studies of Organic Dairy Farming in Wisconsin (Seven Years), New England, and Quebec By Tom Kriegl 1 June 28, 2007 Potential organic dairy producers want to know three things about
More informationSummary of Economic Studies of Organic Dairy Farming in Wisconsin, New England, and Quebec. By Tom Kriegl 1 March 20, 2006
Summary of Economic Studies of Organic Dairy Farming in Wisconsin, New England, and Quebec By Tom Kriegl 1 March 20, 2006 Potential organic dairy producers want to know three things about the economic
More informationChapter 7. Dairy -- Farm Management Wayne A. Knoblauch, Professor George J. Conneman, Professor Emeritus Cathryn Dymond, Extension Support Specialist
Chapter 7. Dairy -- Farm Management Wayne A. Knoblauch, Professor George J. Conneman, Professor Emeritus Cathryn Dymond, Extension Support Specialist Herd Size Comparisons The 171 New York dairy farms
More informationOrganic Dairy Performance in 2015
Animal Industry Report AS 663 ASL R3155 2017 Organic Dairy Performance in 2015 Larry Tranel Iowa State University, tranel@iastate.edu Recommended Citation Tranel, Larry (2017) "Organic Dairy Performance
More informationThe Economic Competitiveness of Dairy Systems Across The U. S. A.
The Economic Competitiveness of Dairy Systems Across The U. S. A. Thomas S. Kriegl University of Wisconsin Center for Dairy Profitability University of Wisconsin-Extension Madison, Wisconsin See http://cdp.wisc.edu
More information2007 Michigan Dairy Grazing Farm Business Analysis Summary. Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf. Staff Paper December, 2008
2007 Michigan Dairy Grazing Farm Business Analysis Summary Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf Staff Paper 2008-5 December, 2008 Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics MICHIGAN STATE
More information2006 Michigan Dairy Grazing Farm Business Analysis Summary. Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf. Staff Paper November, 2007
2006 Michigan Dairy Grazing Farm Business Analysis Summary Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf Staff Paper 2007-09 November, 2007 Department of Agricultural Economics MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing,
More information2009 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary. Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf. Staff Paper December, 2010
2009 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf Staff Paper 2010-04 December, 2010 Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
More informationOrganic Dairy Sector Evolves To Meet Changing Demand
Organic Dairy Sector Evolves To Meet Changing Demand VOLUME 8 ISSUE 1 William D. McBride, wmcbride@ers.usda.gov Catherine Greene, cgreene@ers.usda.gov 28 AMBER WAVES Organic milk production has been one
More informationMilking Center Cost Study New York State
June 2013 EB 2013-10 Milking Center Cost Study New York State 2010-2011 Betsey Howland Jason Karszes Kim Skellie Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
More informationAnnual Summary Data Kentucky Beef Farms 2013
Cooperative Extension Service, University of Kentucky College of Agriculture, Food and Environment. Agricultural Economics - Extension No. 2014-04 Kentucky Farm Business Management Program Annual Summary
More informationCosts For Wisconsin Dairies Using Rotational Grazing Practices: New Evidence From Agricultural Resource Management Survey Data
1 Costs For Wisconsin Dairies Using Rotational Grazing Practices: New Evidence From Agricultural Resource Management Survey Data By Bruce L. Jones 1 Professor and Extension Farm Management Specialist Department
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 80 COWS OR FEWER 2002 PARTICIPANT COPY OCTOBER 2003 E.B
OCTOBER 2003 E.B. 2003-18 DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 80 COWS OR FEWER 2002 Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Mariane Kiraly Jason Karszes PARTICIPANT COPY Department of Applied
More informationAn Economic Comparison of Organic and Conventional Dairy Production, and Estimations on the Cost of Transitioning to Organic Production
An Economic Comparison of Organic and Conventional Dairy Production, and Estimations on the Cost of Transitioning to Organic Production Produced by: the Northeast Organic Farming Association of Vermont
More information2004 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary. Eric Wittenberg Christopher Wolf. Staff Paper September 2005
Staff Paper 2004 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary Eric Wittenberg Christopher Wolf Staff Paper 2005-10 September 2005 Department of Agricultural Economics MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing,
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 120 COWS OR FEWER, 2011 JULY 2012 E.B
DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY JULY 2012 E.B. 2012-04 NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 120 COWS OR FEWER, 2011 Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Jason Karszes Mariane Kiraly Cathryn Dymond Charles H. Dyson School
More information2014 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary. Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf. Staff Paper December, 2015
2014 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf Staff Paper 2015-08 December, 2015 Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
More informationThis guide examines the financial feasibility of
AGRICULTURE Starting a 150-Cow Intensive Rotational Grazing Dairy This guide examines the financial feasibility of starting a 150-cow intensive rotational grazing dairy in Missouri. The model dairy described
More informationThis guide examines the financial feasibility of
AGRICULTURE Starting a 600-Cow Intensive Rotational Grazing Dairy This guide examines the financial feasibility of starting a 600-cow intensive rotational grazing dairy in Missouri. The model dairy described
More informationGrass-fed and Organic Beef: Production Costs and Breakeven Market Prices, 2008 and 2009
AS 658 ASL R2684 2012 Grass-fed and Organic Beef: Production Costs and Breakeven Market Prices, 2008 and 2009 Denise Schwab Iowa State University Margaret Smith Iowa State University H. Joe Sellers Iowa
More informationDetermining Your Unit Costs of Producing A Hundred Weight of Calf
Managing for Today s Cattle Market and Beyond Determining Your Unit Costs of Producing A Hundred Weight of Calf By Harlan Hughes North Dakota State University Unit Costs of Production Astute beef cow producers
More informationAnnual Summary Data Kentucky Beef Farms
Cooperative Extension Service, University of Kentucky College of Agriculture, Food and Environment. Agricultural Economics - Extension No. 2013-13 Kentucky Farm Business Management Program Annual Summary
More informationHerd Size. Level of Production. Summary
$18.22 per cwt which was 5.8 percent higher than the $17.22 per cwt received by the Georgia dairies. While the Florida group had higher total revenue than Georgia dairies, total expense were also higher.
More informationBenchmarking Your Herd s Economic Facts
Managing for Today s Cattle Market and Beyond March 2002 Benchmarking s Economic Facts By Harlan Hughes, North Dakota State University Dwight Aakre, North Dakota State University Introduction Benchmarking
More informationPROJECTING CASH FLOWS ON DAIRY FARMS
January 2002 E.B. 2002-04 PROJECTING CASH FLOWS ON DAIRY FARMS By Eddy L. LaDue Agricultural Finance and Management at Cornell Cornell Program on Agricultural and Small Business Finance Department of Applied
More informationManaging For Today s Cattle Market And Beyond: A Comparative Analysis Of ND - Demo Cow Herd To North Dakota Database
Managing For Today s Cattle Market And Beyond: A Comparative Analysis Of ND - Demo - 160 Cow Herd To North Dakota Database By Harlan Hughes Extension Livestock Economist Dept of Agricultural Economics
More information2015 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary. Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf. Staff Paper November, 2016
2015 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf Staff Paper 2016-01 November, 2016 Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 80 COWS OR FEWER 2007 JULY 2008 E.B
DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY JULY 2008 E.B. 2008-12 NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 80 COWS OR FEWER 2007 Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Mariane Kiraly Jason Karszes Department of Applied Economics and Management
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 140 COWS OR FEWER, 2013 JULY 2014 E.B
DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY JULY 2014 E.B. 2014-07 NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 140 COWS OR FEWER, 2013 Wayne A. Knoblauch Cathryn Dymond Jason Karszes Mariane Kiraly Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics
More information2006 Iowa Farm Costs. and Returns File C1-10. Ag Decision Maker. Definition of Terms Used
2006 Iowa Farm Costs Ag Decision Maker and Returns File C1-10 The farm record data utilized in this report were obtained from the Iowa Farm Business Associations. The average of all farms in each table
More information2007 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary. Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf. Staff Paper December, 2008
2007 Michigan Dairy Farm Business Analysis Summary Eric Wittenberg And Christopher Wolf Staff Paper 2008-04 December, 2008 Department of Agricultural, Food, and Resource Economics MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 80 COWS OR FEWER 2003 DECEMBER 2004 E.B
DECEMBER 2004 E.B. 2004-21 DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 80 COWS OR FEWER 2003 Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Mariane Kiraly Jason Karszes Department of Applied Economics and
More information2003 High Yielding Dairy Farms Compared By Profitability
A UW-RIVER FALLS AGSTAR SCHOLARS REPORT 2003 High Yielding Dairy Farms Compared By Profitability By: Amber Horn-Leiterman 1 and Gregg Hadley 2 1 Amber Horn was a 2004 2005 UW-River Falls AgStar Scholar.
More informationManaging For Today s Cattle Market And Beyond A Comparative Analysis Of Demo Herd 1997 Herd To McKenzie County Database
Managing For Today s Cattle Market And Beyond A Comparative Analysis Of Demo Herd 1997 Herd To McKenzie County Database By Harlan Hughes Extension Livestock Economist Dept of Agricultural Economics North
More informationDairy Replacement Programs: Costs & Analysis 3 rd Quarter 2012
February 2014 EB 2014-02 Dairy Replacement Programs: Costs & Analysis 3 rd Quarter 2012 Jason Karszes PRO-DAIRY Department of Animal Science Charles H. Dyson School of Applied Economics and Management
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 70 COWS OR FEWER 2000 AUGUST 2001 E.B
AUGUST 2001 E.B. 2001-10 DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 70 COWS OR FEWER 2000 Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Mariane Kiraly Jason Karszes Department of Applied Economics and
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM WESTERN NEW YORK REGION 2011 JUNE 2012 E.B
DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY JUNE 2012 E.B. 2012-03 WESTERN NEW YORK REGION 2011 You can t manage what you can t measure. But if you measure it, you can improve it! Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Jason
More informationDAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY CENTRAL VALLEYS REGION 2007 SEPTEMBER 2008 E.B
DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY SEPTEMBER 2008 E.B. 2008-17 CENTRAL VALLEYS REGION 2007 Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Jason Karszes Daniel Murray Charles Z. Radick Cathy S. Wickswat James P. Manning Bonnie
More informationA Study into Dairy Profitability MSC Business Services during
A Study into Dairy Profitability MSC Business Services during 2006-2009 July 2010 Authors: Michael Evanish, Manager Wayne Brubaker, Consultant Lee Wenger, Consultant Page 1 of 43 Page 2 of 43 Index Part
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY DAIRY FARM NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 140 COWS OR FEWER, 2014 JUNE 2015 E.B
DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY JUNE 2015 E.B. 2015-09 NEW YORK SMALL HERD FARMS, 140 COWS OR FEWER, 2014 Wayne A. Knoblauch Cathryn Dymond Jason Karszes Richard Kimmich Charles H. Dyson School of Applied
More information~il~~:~~ii~!. ~...~: {(.~i. !!.~I~ji!': i~i( l:;i;!i:i;i;i:::-: :: C: ..::::)~::m~:l::::t:m:;::;;%::;:!;:;:;:j;.:;:;::::;::j::j:j\:;..
May 1983 A.E. Ext. 83-10 ~il~~:~~ii~!. ~...~:..::::)~::m~:l::::t:m:;::;;::;:!;:;:;:j;.:;:;::::;::j::j:j\:;.. ;/::@H::;j'::;{:: ::::;:;:;:;:::;:::::::::::::;: ::::::;:::::;:;:::;:::::;::::: ~ ~::: ~: ~:
More informationDAIRY GRAZING FARMS FINANCIAL SUMMARY:
DAIRY GRAZING FARMS FINANCIAL SUMMARY: Regional/Multi-State Interpretation of Small Farm Data Fourth Year Report Data from 2003, 2002, 2001, and 2000 Funded by USDA Initiative for Future Agricultural and
More informationAppendix I Whole Farm Analysis Procedures and Measures
Appendix I Whole Farm Analysis Procedures and Measures The whole-farm reports (except for the balance sheets) include the same number of farms, which were all of the farms whose records were judged to
More informationDairy Industry Trends in NYS - Benchmarking
Dairy Industry Trends in NYS - Benchmarking Jason Karszes Senior Extension Associate PRO-DAIRY B21 Morrison Hall e-mail JK57@Cornell.edu Cornell University Phone 607-255-3809 Ithaca, NY 14853 Department
More informationInvestment Analysis of Alternative Dairy Systems under MILC
Investment Analysis of Alternative Dairy Systems under MILC Phillip R. Eberle Department of Agribusiness Economics Southern Illinois University Carbondale Carbondale, IL 62901-4410 618-453-1715 email eberlep@siu.edu
More informationBeef Cow Enterprises 2000 Costs and Returns Summary. Kentucky Farm Business Management Program
Beef Cow Enterprises 2 Costs and Returns Summary Kentucky Farm Business Management Program Rick Costin Agricultural Economics - Extension No. 22-1 September 22 University of Kentucky Department of Agricultural
More informationEconomics 330 Fall 2005 Exam 1. Strategic Planning and Budgeting
Economics 330 Fall 2005 Exam 1 K E Y Strategic Planning and Budgeting Circle the letter of the best answer. You may put a square around the letter of your second choice. If your second choice is right,
More informationProduction Economics of Ohio Dairy Farms
Production Economics of Ohio Dairy Farms 1996-2005 Donald J. Breece Ph.D. Farm Management Specialist Ohio State University Extension October, 2006 For the past ten years financial and production data was
More informationThis guide examines the financial feasibility of
AGRICULTURE Converting an Existing Dairy to the Missouri 75-Cow Grazing Dairy Model This guide examines the financial feasibility of creating a new Missouri grass-based dairy by converting an existing
More informationCosts to Produce Milk in Illinois 2016
Costs to Produce Milk in Illinois 2016 Costs to Produce Milk in Illinois 2016 University of Illinois Farm Business Management Resources FBM-0160 Brandy M. Krapf, Dwight D. Raab, and Bradley L. Zwilling
More informationCash Flow and Enterprise Information - step two for your 2016 farm analysis
1 of 24 Name Address County Phone Email Year Born Year Started Farming Cash Flow and Enterprise Information - step two for your 2016 farm analysis Now that you have a beginning and an ending balance sheet,
More information2007 PLANNING BUDGETS FOR DAIRY PRODUCTION IN MISSISSIPPI COSTS AND RETURNS. 112 and 250 COW DAIRY ENTERPRISES LARGE BREED CATTLE MISSISSIPPI, 2007
2007 PLANNING BUDGETS FOR DAIRY PRODUCTION IN MISSISSIPPI COSTS AND RETURNS 112 and 250 COW DAIRY ENTERPRISES LARGE BREED CATTLE MISSISSIPPI, 2007 MISSISSIPPI STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION SERVICE MISSISSIPPI
More informationLooking for Profitability: Managing Dairy Production Costs
Looking for Profitability: Managing Dairy Production Costs 2017 Ag Lender Seminar at Wooster Dianne Shoemaker Field Specialist, Dairy Production Economics $25 US Dairy Support Price, Class 3, and All Milk
More informationCow-Calf Enterprise Standardized Performance Analysis
Cow-Calf Enterprise Standardized Performance Analysis Overview Cattlemen are challenged to reduce production costs, be more competitive, and increase market share and profits. The first step to lowering
More informationAgriculture & Business Management Notes...
Agriculture & Business Management Notes... SPA Standardized Performance Analysis For Cow/Calf Producers -- A Worksheet Approach -- Cow/calf producers have been challenged to be lower cost producers, to
More information2013 Ohio Farm Business Analysis
2013 Ohio Farm Business Analysis Dairy Enterprise Analysis Summary Including Benchmark Reports For information on participating in the Ohio Farm Business Analysis program analyzing your farm s 2014 performance,
More informationCATTLE MAY HAVE A DECENT, BUT VOLATILE YEAR
CATTLE MAY HAVE A DECENT, BUT VOLATILE YEAR FEBRUARY 2004 Chris Hurt 2004 NO. 2 Summary Early indications are that 2004 will not be as difficult for the cattle industry as many producers had feared in
More informationCustom Raising Dairy Heifers: Expectations and Perspectives of Wisconsin Dairy Producers
Custom Raising Dairy Heifers: Expectations and Perspectives of Wisconsin Dairy Producers P. C. Hoffman, UW-Madison Dairy Science Department D. J. Schuster, UW-Madison Center for Integrated Agricultural
More informationCosts to Produce Milk in Illinois 2003
Costs to Produce Milk in Illinois 2003 University of Illinois Farm Business Management Resources FBM-0160 Costs to Produce Milk in Illinois 2003 Dale H. Lattz Extension Specialist, Farm Management Department
More information2016 Ohio Farm Business Summary
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION 2016 Ohio Farm Business Summary Dairy Enterprise Analysis with Benchmark Reports Our Thanks To: The professionals who worked with farms and completed the analyses included
More informationOur Thanks To: The professionals who worked with farms and completed the analyses included in this summary:
Our Thanks To: The professionals who worked with farms and completed the analyses included in this summary: Christina Benton, Program Assistant, Ohio State University Extension Haley Drake, Program Coordinator,
More informationJUNE 2005 E.B NEW YORK LARGE HERD FARMS, 300 COWS OR LARGER 2004 SUMMARY DAIRY FARM
JUNE 2005 E.B. 2005-05 DAIRY FARM BUSINESS SUMMARY BUSINESS SUMMARY NEW YORK LARGE HERD FARMS, 300 COWS OR LARGER 2004 Jason Karszes Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Department of Applied Economics and
More informationContribution of Federal Lands to Wyoming Range Livestock Production, 1992
B-993 February 1994 0 Contribution of Federal Lands to Wyoming Range Livestock Production, 1992 Brett R. Moline Robert R. Fletcher David T. Taylor Gerald Fink Frank Henderson University of Wyoming, Cooperative
More informationKANSAS FARM MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION ENTERPRISE ANALYSIS: EXAMINING DIFFERENCES AMONG HIGH-, MEDIUM-, AND LOW-PROFIT DAIRY OPERATIONS
Dairy Research 2005 KANSAS FARM MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION ENTERPRISE ANALYSIS: EXAMINING DIFFERENCES AMONG HIGH-, MEDIUM-, AND LOW-PROFIT DAIRY OPERATIONS K. C. Dhuyvetter 1 and T. L. Kastens 1 Summary Thirty-one
More informationInternal Herd Growth Generating Profits through Management
Internal Herd Growth Generating Profits through Management What is Internal Herd Growth Generating more dairy replacements than you need to maintain herd size. Interaction of two components: How many replacements
More informationHerd Management. Lesson 4: Herd Management. Figure Parallel Milking Parlor. Production Costs
Herd Management Lesson 4: Herd Management Figure 4.2 - Parallel Milking Parlor Dairy herd management is an important part of dairy production. Dairy operations require a large investment and usually operate
More information2011 STATE FFA FARM BUSINESS MANAGEMENT TEST PART 2. Financial Statements (FINPACK Balance Sheets found in the resource information)
2011 STATE FFA FARM BUSINESS MANAGEMENT TEST PART 2 Financial Statements (FINPACK Balance Sheets found in the resource information) Please use the Market Value when making the calculations for the Zimmerman
More informationABSTRACT FARM COSTS AND RETURNS STUDIES
COSTS and RETURNS ABSTRACT Net returns in 1970 were record-high on viable commercial cattle ranches in the Northern Plains and Northern Rocky Mountain areas, 2 of the most important cow-calf producing
More information1998 Dairy Enterprise Analysis
1998 Dairy Enterprise Analysis KENTUCKY FARM BUSINESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Agricultural Economics Extension No. 2000-03 February 2000 By: RUSH MIDKIFF, DARWIN FOLEY, BART PETERS, AND CRAIG INFANGER University
More informationWhy Did Some Beef Cow Producers Weather The Last Five, Tough Years In Good Shape, While Others Suffered Severely?
Why And How Should A Rancher Calculate His Herd s Unit Cost Of Production? By Harlan Hughes Extension Livestock Economist, Retired North Dakota State University May 2000 1 Why Did Some Beef Cow Producers
More informationMissouri Dairy Industry Revitalization Study. Joe Horner Extension Dairy Economist MU Commercial Agriculture Program
Missouri Dairy Industry Revitalization Study Joe Horner Extension Dairy Economist MU Commercial Agriculture Program Roadmap to Dairy Revitalization Sustain Existing Producers Benchmark competitiveness
More informationCORNELL AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS STAFF PAPER
CORNELL AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS STAFF PAPER The Cost of Producing Milk as a Management Tool Eddy L. LaDue Staff Paper No. 92-17 November 1992 Department of Agricultural Economics Cornell University Agricultural
More informationThe Components of Grazing Profitability. Joe Horner Extension Dairy Economist University of Missouri Extension - Commercial Agriculture Program
The Components of Grazing Profitability Joe Horner Extension Dairy Economist University of Missouri Extension - Commercial Agriculture Program MU Pasture-based Dairy Team Stacey Hamilton Tony Rickard Ted
More informationBUSINESS SUMMARY NEW YORK. C.A. Bratton
June 1976 A.E. Res. 76-7 DAIRY FARM MANAGEMENT BUSINESS SUMMARY NEW YORK 1975 C.A. Bratton n, Department of Agricultural Economics Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station New York State College
More informationBrief History. Keys to Starting a Dairy Career. Our Dairy Farm Stats. Getting Started as a Producer. Things to learn from Wade (College)
Keys to Starting a Dairy Career Ridgeview Dairy Farms Grant & April Post family Brief History Raised on a dairy farm by Lake Wilson, MN Did a lot of milking and labor on the farm growing up Attended Ridgewater
More information-en CENTRAL PLAIN REGION May 1984 A.E. Ext. 84~14. Linda D. Putnam
May 1984 A.E. Ext. 84~14 CENTRAL PLAIN REGION 1983 -en Wayne A. Knoblauch Linda D. Putnam Deportment of Agricultural Economics New York State College of Agriculture and life Sciences " Sialulory College
More informationPROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR BEEF CATTLE, DAIRY PRODUCTION, SWINE PRODUCTION AND FORAGE CROPS IN LOUISIANA, 1997
January 1997 A.E.A. Information Series No. 150 PROJECTED COSTS AND RETURNS FOR BEEF CATTLE, DAIRY PRODUCTION, SWINE PRODUCTION AND FORAGE CROPS IN LOUISIANA, 1997 by Robert W. Boucher Jeffrey M. Gillespie
More informationObservations of Custom Heifer Raising by WI Dairy Producers
Observations of Custom Heifer Raising by WI Dairy Producers Presented by Tina Kohlman & Abby Huibregtse Sheboygan & Oconto County Dairy & Livestock Agents Survey conducted by UW-Extension Dairy Team &
More informationECONOMICS OF PASTURE- BASED DAIRY FARMING
1 ECONOMICS OF PASTURE- BASED DAIRY FARMING G.A. BENSON DEPT. OF AGRICULTURAL & RESOURCE ECONOMICS NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY Presented at the Mid-Atlantic Dairy Grazing Conference, Goldsboro, NC
More informationFARM BUSINESS PLANNING AND ENTITY AGREEMENTS. by Darwin Foley
N E W S L E T T E R Vol. 3 No. 1 July 14, 1999 Kentucky Farm Business Management Program State Newsletter Rick Costin, Editor INSIDE Farm Business Planning and Entity Agreements..................... 1
More informationDFBS Expert System For Analyzing Dairy Fa~ Businesses
February 1995 E.B. 95-04 DFBS Expert System For Analyzing Dairy Fa~ Businesses Users' Guide for Ver ion 5.0 by Linda D. Putnam Stuart F. Smith Department of Agricultural, Resource, and Managerial Economics
More informationU.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE August 1972 FCR-83 cooperating with New Mexico State University COSTS NOV
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE ECONOMIC RESEARCH SERVICE August 1972 FCR-83 cooperating with New Mexico State University COSTS NOV 2 1872 and RETURNS FARM COSTS AND RETURNS STUDIES This report is part
More informationGrazing in the dairy state
Grazing in the dairy state Pasture use in the Wisconsin dairy industry, 1993-2003 Jennifer Taylor, UW-Madison Center for Integrated Agricultural Systems Jeremy Foltz, UW-Madison Program on Agricultural
More informationThe High Plains Dairy Conference does not support one product over another and any mention herein is meant as an example, not an endorsement.
Sponsored Topic Surviving or Thriving? Key Profitability Drivers in the Dairy Industry Kevin C. Dhuyvetter, Ph.D. Elanco Animal Health, Technical Consultant Email: kdhuyvetter@elanco.com EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
More information2017 Ohio Farm Business Summary
OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY EXTENSION 2017 Ohio Farm Business Summary Dairy Enterprise Analysis with Benchmark Reports farmprofitability.osu.edu Our Thanks To: The professionals who worked with farms and completed
More informationIncreasing Dairy Base with Millionaire Model Dairy Farms
Animal Industry Report AS 652 ASL R2098 2006 Increasing Dairy Base with Millionaire Model Dairy Farms Larry Tranel Iowa State University Recommended Citation Tranel, Larry (2006) "Increasing Dairy Base
More information1999 Dairy Enterprise Analysis
1999 Dairy Enterprise Analysis KENTUCKY FARM BUSINESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Agricultural Economics Extension No. 2000-16 January 2001 By: COLBY A. BLAIR, JACK MCALLISTER, AND RUSH MIDKIFF University of Kentucky
More informationCharacteristics of Highly Profitable Dairy Farms: Striking the Right Balance.
Characteristics of Highly Profitable Dairy Farms: Striking the Right Balance. Dairy Roundtable Discussions March & April 2009 Gary Snider, Agricultural Business Consultant. Farm Credit of WNY Mike Hosterman,
More informationHog Enterprise Summary
1990-98 Hog Enterprise Summary KENTUCKY FARM BUSINESS MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Agricultural Economics Extension No. 2000-01 February 2000 By: GREGG IBENDAHL, RICK COSTIN, RICHARD COFFEY, AND RON FLEMING University
More informationProducer Price and Milk Cost of Production Order, amendment
THE MILK PRICES REVIEW ACT (C.C.S.M. c. M130) Producer Price and Milk Cost of Production Order, amendment Regulation 190/2006 Registered September 13, 2006 Manitoba Regulation 77/94 amended 1 The Producer
More information